Elza
Member
Well, I've never had any use for a Barret .50 up to this point. However....... 
How can this be legal? TxDOT speed cameras using FEDERAL money
- Thread starter CanonNinja
- Start date
- Status
Dravur
Member
Wooohoooo.
I saw a site that showed what happens to these things in Great Britain. They are targeted like Rosie Odonnel targets donuts.
Let's see.....
I really doubt these ar bulletproof
paintproof
Baseball bat proof
Javelina proof
Yeah, I can see these things lasting all of 20 minutes.
I saw a site that showed what happens to these things in Great Britain. They are targeted like Rosie Odonnel targets donuts.
Let's see.....
I really doubt these ar bulletproof
paintproof
Baseball bat proof
Javelina proof
Yeah, I can see these things lasting all of 20 minutes.
gregthehand
Member
I passed under the one in College Station on my way home from work everyday. It's totally out in the open. Kind of silly that they put it like that. 
Flyboy
Member
Aquapong nailed it:
Huh? Lives? Safety? What?
That's right, folks: your government's definition of success isn't public safety, it's revenue. A quarter-billion here, a fifth of a billion there--that's real success to the government.
Huh? Lives? Safety? What?
oneshooter
Member
Cameras
Seems that these guys may be selling a LOT more product!
http://www.phantomplate.com/
Oneshooter
Livin in Texas
Seems that these guys may be selling a LOT more product!
http://www.phantomplate.com/
Oneshooter
Livin in Texas
precisionshootist
Member
- Joined
- Apr 12, 2007
- Messages
- 186
Well unless the laws are changed I think it would have to be proved that the person issued the citation was in fact the person driving the vehicle at the time of the offense. Simple remedy is everyone who gets a ticket from one of these automated cameras elects a trial by jury. Number one, you will most likely win. Number two, jury trials will drive the cost up so high the cameras will be for sale on Ebay in no time.
precisionshootist:
They charge you with a civil infraction. ALL the cards are in their hands, as my wife found out when she was nabbed by a red light camera in the midst of a fubared intersection (due to construction).
I'm thinking a scoped .22LR bolt action would do the trick.
They charge you with a civil infraction. ALL the cards are in their hands, as my wife found out when she was nabbed by a red light camera in the midst of a fubared intersection (due to construction).
I'm thinking a scoped .22LR bolt action would do the trick.
precisionshootist
Member
- Joined
- Apr 12, 2007
- Messages
- 186
"cival infraction" ? what is that? Since when is speeding two different types of violations? Even with the red light camera issue, how do they prove it was your wife driving and not you? My wife and I switch vehicles all the time. What if a friend or relective borrows your vehicle. I just don't see any way they could make this stuff stick without the picture clearly showing the driver. How did your situation turn out? Did you make a challenge in court or did they just "convice" you that they will win.
Looks like all of the points have already been hit. Citing revenue figures as success is stupidity, tyranny, or whatever you want to call it(be creative). The idea behind speed limits is to keep people from going so fast they crash. I'll not get into how well it works, that's a whole 'nother issue.
I think that's a site I've been to before. One thing they mention is dubious placement of the cameras, and changes in speed limits and such after they're placed. The two I remember was one that was placed a few meters too far away from the curve or whatever to encourage slowing down, and the other was the speed reduction, I can't remember if it was five or ten MPH, but it was significant.
It seems that Britain, even with all those cameras, has trouble catching the responsible parties even in urban areas. Think about the Texas countryside, and the fact that we have guns. I'd imagine that there'll be a new category of long range shooting opening up if this goes into effect.
I think that's a site I've been to before. One thing they mention is dubious placement of the cameras, and changes in speed limits and such after they're placed. The two I remember was one that was placed a few meters too far away from the curve or whatever to encourage slowing down, and the other was the speed reduction, I can't remember if it was five or ten MPH, but it was significant.
It seems that Britain, even with all those cameras, has trouble catching the responsible parties even in urban areas. Think about the Texas countryside, and the fact that we have guns. I'd imagine that there'll be a new category of long range shooting opening up if this goes into effect.
Rem700SD
Member
How big of microwave gun would it take to scramble one of these things?
precision:
They do not have to prove who drove it, the owner has to prove they weren't driving it and then produce someone for the city to fine.
It was a $75 fine, if you pay it & don't squawk or assert any rights.
If you want a "preliminary hearing" by a former cop who works for the city and signs off on these charges, it costs you somewhere in the neighborhood of a extra $50 just to talk to someone about the deal. If you want to actually fight the deal in court, the accused pays court costs, which will likely exceed the original $75 ticket in and of themselves.
So, to finally get your day in court, you will end up spending more than the original $75 civil ticket.
We have two kids to take care of & can not afford the time & extra cash required to take the case (with all odds stacked against us) to court.
You can't get proper justice without paying for it, don't you know?
They do not have to prove who drove it, the owner has to prove they weren't driving it and then produce someone for the city to fine.
It was a $75 fine, if you pay it & don't squawk or assert any rights.
If you want a "preliminary hearing" by a former cop who works for the city and signs off on these charges, it costs you somewhere in the neighborhood of a extra $50 just to talk to someone about the deal. If you want to actually fight the deal in court, the accused pays court costs, which will likely exceed the original $75 ticket in and of themselves.
So, to finally get your day in court, you will end up spending more than the original $75 civil ticket.
We have two kids to take care of & can not afford the time & extra cash required to take the case (with all odds stacked against us) to court.
You can't get proper justice without paying for it, don't you know?
ServiceSoon
Member
and of course, that product is illegal in some states.
Daniel T
Member
Not to mention that it doesn't work anyway. Mythbusters tested it and other products like it thoroughly.
K3
Member
Mud works better.
K3
Member
I'd pay to see that.
It is not the elderly that cause accidents; it is the old and young alike that drive around with their mouths hanging open, and or distracted with other things.
The speeding ticket is a source of revenue. That is the long and the short of it.
While the TxDOT may have appeared to have pulled a sneaky by awaiting the passing of the legislative session, it is more likely that thay have simply taken the heat off the legislature on the issue. Let's see how quickly they shut down TxDOT's "sneaky" collusion with Federal funds and cameras when they meet at the next session
--------------------------------------
http://searchronpaul.com
http://ussliberty.org
http://ssunitedstates.org
The speeding ticket is a source of revenue. That is the long and the short of it.
While the TxDOT may have appeared to have pulled a sneaky by awaiting the passing of the legislative session, it is more likely that thay have simply taken the heat off the legislature on the issue. Let's see how quickly they shut down TxDOT's "sneaky" collusion with Federal funds and cameras when they meet at the next session
--------------------------------------
http://searchronpaul.com
http://ussliberty.org
http://ssunitedstates.org
Double Naught Spy
Sus Venator
If you are dumb or careless enough to get caught speeding, then you deserve to pay the fine.
jfruser
In Texas, speeding is actually a criminal offense - a crime, albeit a misdemeanor. It is not as in some states where the infraction rules apply.
In any criminal case, I believe, a statement to the effect of; "I deny having commiting the alleged crime" or " ... any crime" - followed by electing to remain silent as is one's right before a court places the burden of proof on the prosecution.
In Texas, speeding is actually a criminal offense - a crime, albeit a misdemeanor. It is not as in some states where the infraction rules apply.
In any criminal case, I believe, a statement to the effect of; "I deny having commiting the alleged crime" or " ... any crime" - followed by electing to remain silent as is one's right before a court places the burden of proof on the prosecution.
No, they aren't regulating anything and there are no federal speeding tickets (except on reservations, military bases, or in D.C.). This is basically the power of the purse. The feds can spend their (our) money on almost anything... mating habits of mosquitos and such.
LAK:
It was a red-light camera placed in a heavy-construction zone (Legacy & NDT when it was torn all to hades). The law/ordinance cited by the ticket-ers was a City of Plano ordinance, not a State of Texas law.
Yep, the first thing they got up after the traffic lights was the red light cameras. Even before all the pavement, markings, & such. Nice.
It was a red-light camera placed in a heavy-construction zone (Legacy & NDT when it was torn all to hades). The law/ordinance cited by the ticket-ers was a City of Plano ordinance, not a State of Texas law.
Yep, the first thing they got up after the traffic lights was the red light cameras. Even before all the pavement, markings, & such. Nice.
- Status
